Wednesday, 22 August 2007

Global Citizen or National Citizen?

Over the last one hundred years the world has become a much smaller place. A trip from London to Sydney that used to take weeks at sea can now be achieved in less than a day. Clearly, news can only travel as fast as the fastest medium and as radio and then television caught on the world became so much closer than before. Now, with worldwide mobile services, email and instant communication brought about by the rise of the Internet the world is probably as small as it's ever going to get (at least until faster than sound air travel becomes the norm). We feel like people in London, New York, Moscow or Nairobi are right next door, in our own neighbourhood. We hear their problems, which are like ours, we empathise with their aspirations for a successful life and we agree that we all need to look after the world. We watch American sitcoms, British documentaries and subtitled French movies and absorb a part of it all into ourselves.

In this way our sense of ourselves as having a national identity has been eroded away and replaced with that of a Global Citizen.

Don't agree? Why do you see so many more Australians now referring to the Australian flag not as a national emblem but as a symbol of racism? Ditto in the USA, England and other Western countries. Why does the hopelessly corrupt and mostly ineffective United Nations receive such wide support? Because it is seen as the global authority needed in an age of globalisation.We see Al Gore stride the globe promoting catastrophic predictions due to climate change and are left with the impression that this large, earnest gentlemen cares about the world because he's a Global Citizen first and an American second. Ditto with the ubiquitous Richard Branson. We see him flying here, there and everywhere and recognise him as an international figure - a Global Citizen. We are also bombarded with visiting sporting stars like Roger Federer who come here, win all the time, and we take to heart. Same with 'Our Kim', Kim Clijsters. We form bonds with these non-citizens in almost the same was that we do with our own sporting stars. I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with that, as it happens, I just use it by way of example of showing how resistance is lowered by a series of little things.How about this? In countries that do not have the same development of infrastructure in the West, and therefore little or no access to the Internet, we see terrific patriotism and flag waving at even the slightest opportunity. Don't agree? Then why can you tell me what the flag of Lebanon looks like?

There's an old saying, "Think global, act local", which was thought up by the environmental movement to make a connection between people's local activity and 'the good of the world'. Given the loopy things people actually get up to I modified it to "Think global, act loco" but a Google search a couple of years ago showed that I was about twenty years late with that one.

The loss of belief in God in secular Europe has certainly created the vacuum for Global Citizenship (and its attendant belief in environmentalism) to fill the void, as has the sustained attack by leftist institutions on our Judeo-Christian values.

Rounding out the erosion of national identity is the implementation of a multicultural policy and its associated cultural relativism. Unfortunately, cultural relativism is the Mr Hyde to our multicultural aspirations' Dr Jekyll. We are taught that our culture is no better than anyone else's, thus the exceptional aspects of our culture are flattened by cultural relativism's lowest common denominator outcome.

So now we have a large number of people that think of themselves as Global Citizens first and Australians (or Americans or Brits or Germans or, especially, Belgians) second. These people are almost exclusively on the left of the political spectrum and this inversion of citizenship priorities helps explain their support for Islam, a culture which puts Islam, and the desire for a worldwide Umma, first and the requirements and expectations of their nationality or place of residence second.

Global Citizenry is a fool's dream. It is based on the assumption that you can be more important than you really are but without having to change much to be more important, and let's face it, who doesn't want to be more important than we are right now? Hugo Chavez sees himself as a Global Citizen and world leader. In the meantime, the Venezuelan economy is going through the floor, there are food shortages and inflation is heading towards three figures. The crazy Iranian, Armindinnerjacket, promotes himself in the same way. Meanwhile, the oil-fed Iranian economy spirals out of control, forcing people onto the street in protest (a dangerous thing in Iran), while the Mullahs continue to build nuclear weapons. In the name of Global goodness the Global Citizen Gore would implement policies that would in all likelihood double the US unemployment rate sending the US and, ironically, Europe into a massive recession.

In order to promote the leftist concept of a Global Citizen, the left uses its instruments of influence, the media, universities, unions and political parties to attack national emblems. Thus the attack on the flag as a racist symbol, the support of indigenous people that refer to Australia Day as Invasion Day, the writing out of the high points of our cultural achievements, which are replaced with a raising in importance of even the smallest sin of our past. Why would a young student want to identify with a culture whose history is thus distorted?

The greatest person you can be in life is a patriot. Defend those values that made us great, that are exceptional, that underpin our progress and allow us to achieve our multicultural aspirations without losing our unique sense of national identity. It is up to all good people of the world, regardless of political association, religious belief or ethnicity to stand up and fight against the malign concept of Global Citizenry.

4 comments:

Oh come off it! Your final plea reveals the stupidity of this whole premise:

"It is up to all good people of the world, regardless of political association, religious belief or ethnicity to stand up and fight against the malign concept of Global Citizenry."

In other words, I call upon all global citizens to resist the concept of global citizenry!

What are you really afraid of? That your shallow vision of national identity might be a little less substantial than you always believed? That all those wars and football victories might be of far less consequence than their sponsors informed you? That you, as a person, have based your life on a meaningless fantasy of tribal identity?

Like it or not, we are all global citizens, we were all born equal under God, and we all bear the same burden of responsibility for the life we lead.

You have managed to write complete tosh. I did not "...call upon all global citizens to resist the concept..." That's your projection coming to the fore.

I called on everyone in the world to take pride in their own, national identity and rail against those self-identified global citizens whose major feature is promoting positions 'in the name of everyone in the world'.